Bombay High Court
MADAN RAMEKBAL GIRIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Rejected
Holding
The bail application was denied as the applicant is not entitled to bail.
Summary
The applicant, Madan Ramekbal Giri, sought bail in a case where he was alleged to have instigated the assault and murder of his sister‑in‑law by directing her to inflict specific injuries via a telephone conversation. The FIR charges him under IPC sections 302, 304B, 498A, 201, 109 and 34, as well as Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The prosecution presented evidence that the applicant gave detailed instructions to cause injuries without leaving marks, which resulted in the victim’s death from multiple head injuries. The applicant argued that he had been in custody for over five years without trial, was a senior citizen, and that the lack of voice samples weakened the case against him. The Court, however, found a prima facie case of serious offence and deemed the applicant’s role pivotal, rejecting the bail application and directing the trial court to expedite the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused despite the seriousness of the offences (murder, dowry death, and related charges).
- Whether the length of pre‑trial detention and the applicant’s senior citizen status warrant bail.
- Whether the absence of voice sample evidence affects the prima facie case against the applicant.
- Whether the role of co‑accused on bail influences the bail decision for the applicant.
Legislation cited
- Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109, 201, 302, 304B, 34, 498A
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- dowry death
- instigation
- IPC
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- pre‑trial detention
- senior citizen
Judgment
WAKLE MANOJ 17-BA-1610-2026.DOC
MANOJ
JANARDHAN
Digitally signed by
WAKLE MANOJ
JANARDHAN
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Date: 2026.10.07
15:55:09 +0530
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1610 OF 2026
Madan Ramekbal Giri …Applicant
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra …Respondent
Ms. Sana Khan a/w Adv. Parag Sawant i/by SRK Legal, for the
Applicant.
Mr. H. J. Dedia, APP for the Respondent-State.
PSI – N.B. Gaikwad, Shivaji Nagar Police Station, Ambernath(E),
present.
CORAM: SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.
DATED : 5th OCTOBER, 2026
P.C. :-
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the record.
2. Applicant seeks his release on bail in connection with an FIR
bearing Crime No.32 of 2021, registered with Shivaji Nagar Police
Station, Ambernath (E), for the offence punishable under Sections
302, 304B, 498A, 201, 109 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
(“IPC”) and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, on
the report dated 29th January, 2021 filed by Mr. Jayendra Bhoyer,
API.
3. The prosecution case is that, accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 are
daughter, Son and wife of the applicant. The deceased was wife of
accused No.3 and they got married with each other on 30 th June,
2020. It is alleged that, after the marriage, for some days the
deceased was treated properly by the accused persons. It is alleged
that, on 15th August, 2020, all the accused persons assaulted the
deceased to coerce her to fulfilling their unlawful demand of gold
Page 1 of 7
MANOJ 17-BA-1610-2026.DOC
items and motorcycle. It is alleged that, on 21 st January 2021,
accused No.1 assaulted the deceased with a sharp weapon and a
wooden stick, at the instigation of the applicant. As a result, the
deceased sustained serious injuries and died due to the said
injuries. It is alleged that all the four accused caused disappearance
of the evidence. Therefore, the accused were arrested and on
completion of investigation, police submitted the charge-sheet. The
trial Court refused to release the applicant on bail. His Criminal Bail
Application No.4230 of 2023, filed before this Court is rejected by
an Order dated 1st July, 2024.
4. Ms. Khan, the learned counsel for the applicant submitted
that, as alleged, the applicant had telephonically instigated accused
No.1 to assault the deceased. However, during investigating, police
did not take voice samples of the applicant and accused No.1 to
confirm that the subject matter recorded telephonic conversation
had occurred between the two. She submitted that the applicant is
in jail since his arrest on 29 th January, 2021, which is more than 5
years and 8 months. Although the charge was framed on 29 th
October, 2025, till date, only PW1 is being examined, whose
examination-in-chief is still incomplete. Meanwhile, on 81 dates,
the applicant was not produced before the trial Court. As such, his
incarceration is turning punitive, and he is entitled for bail. The
applicant is a senior citizen. She submitted that accused No. 4 is on
bail. Therefore, the applicant may be released on bail.
5. Following cases are cited to support these submissions :-
(a) Chintan Vidyasagar Upadhyay Vs. The State of
Maharashtra, Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)
No.2543 of 2021 dated 17.09.2021.
(b) Union of Indian(UoI) Vs. K. A. Najeeb, reported in (2021)
3 SCC 713.
Page 2 of 7
MANOJ 17-BA-1610-2026.DOC
(c) Avinash Anant Pawar @ Ajit Dada Vs. The State of
Maharashtra, Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)
No.1452/ 2022 dated 11.08.2022.
6. In reply, Mr. Dedhia, the learned APP submitted that the
deceased was brutally assaulted at the instigation of the applicant
on phone. The offence is very serious. Therefore, bail be refused.
7. I have considered these submissions. The material on record
clearly indicate that the deceased was assaulted by accused No.1 at
the instigation of the applicant on phone. While rejecting the earlier
bail application of this applicant, this Court has observed that
during the telephonic conversation with accused No.1, the applicant
had told her that she should give blows on such parts of the body of
the deceased that the deceased would suffer injuries, but the assault
would not leave any marks on her body. The applicant even told
accused No.1 to hit on the private parts of the deceased and to take
care of not to hit on the bones. He had used extremely abusive
language in telling accused No.1 to assault the deceased. It is also
noted that the instigation was to cause specific injuries which had
resulted in the death. The deceased was treated with extreme
cruelty which is captured in the videos.
8. The cause of the death of the deceased was head injury with
multiple injuries. As per record, the deceased had following injuries.
1) Abrasions of size 2cm x 0.3cm and 3cm x 0.5cm over left
shoulder with dark red scab (two in numbers)
2) Abrasions of size 2cm x 0.3cm over left shoulder anterior
aspect with dark red scab.
3) Multiple abrasions of size 6cm x 1cm over right posterior
aspect of the shoulder (seven in numbers) with dark red
scab.
Page 3 of 7
MANOJ 17-BA-1610-2026.DOC
4) Abrasion of size 1cm x 0.5cm over left lower eyelid with
dark red scab.
5) Abrasion of size 2cm x 1cm over middle aspect of the
dorsum of nose with dark red scab obliquely situated.
6) Multiple abrasions of size 1cm x 0.5cm (eight to ten in
numbers) over dorsal aspect of the right forearm with
dark red scab.
7) Two abrasions of size 2cm x 1cm and 1cm x 0.5cm over
dorsum of right middle finger with dark red scab.
8) Abrasion of of size 6cm x 0.5cm over abdomen hypo
gastric region. 7cm above the umbilicus horizontally
situated with dark red swab.
9) Multiple linear abrasions of length 3cm (seven in
numbers) noted over left side of abdomen umbilicus
region obliquely situated 13cm lateral to umbilicus with
dark red swab.
10) Abrasions of size 2cm x 0.3cm over middle finger dorsal
aspect (five in numbers) and size 1cm x 0.3cm over
dorsum of ring finger (four in numbers) of right hand
with dark red swab.
11) Multiple abrasions of size ringing from 3cm x 0.5cm to
0.5cm x 0.3cm over anterior aspen of the left knee with
dark red scab.
12) Abrasions of size 1cm x 0.5cm (four in numbers) over left
thigh, middle half region with dark red scab.
13) Two abrasions of size 2cm x 1cm and 1 cm x 1cm over
lateral aspect of right buttock with dark red Scab.
14) Two abrasions of size 3cm x 0.5cm, obliquely situated
over right back over scapular region with dark red scab.
15) Multiple abrasions of size ranging from 2 cm x 0.3cm to
0.3cm x 0.2cm over upper back and left Scapular region
(Seven in numbers) with dark red Scab.
16) Abrasions of size 2cm x 0.3cm to 0.3cm x0.2cm over
lower back (Eight in numbers) with dark red scab.
Page 4 of 7
MANOJ 17-BA-1610-2026.DOC
17) Abrasion of size 2cm x 1cm over aspect palmar of left
hand with dark red Scab.
18) Contusion of right lower eyelid, subcutaneous deep red in
colour.
19) Contusion of left lower eyelid, subcutaneous deep red in
colour.
20) Contusion of size 8cm x 4cm x subcutaneous deep over
right shoulder, red in colour.
21) Contusion of size 7cm x 4cm x subcutaneous deep over
left shoulder, red in colour.
22) Contusion of size 4cm x 3cm x subcutaneous deep over
right forearm dorsal aspect, distal 1/3rd region, red in
colour.
23) Three contusions of size 4cm x 4cm, 3cm x 3cm and 3cm
x 2cm over dorsum of right hand, subcutaneous deep red
in colour.
24) Contusion of size 5cm x 3cm x subcutaneous deep noted
over dorsum of right hand, red in colour.
25) Contusion of size 4cm x 3cm x subcutaneous deep noted
over lateral aspect of the left arm, lower 1/3rd region, red
in colour.
26) Contusion of size 7cm x 3cm x subcutaneous deep over
anterior aspect of the right thigh middle 1/3rd region, red
in colour.
27) Two contusions of size 3cm x 2cm and 3cm x 1cm over
right middle 1/3rd region, red in colour.
28) Contusion of size 6cm x 1cm x subcietaneous deep noted
over right middle 1/3rd of the thigh, red in colour.
29) Contusion of size 6cm x 2cm x subcutaneous deep over
left thigh middle aspect, red in colour.
30) Contusion of size 2cm x 1cm x subcutaneous deep over left
thigh middle 1/3 rd region, red in colour.
Page 5 of 7
MANOJ 17-BA-1610-2026.DOC
31) Contusion of size 7cm x 6cm x subcutaneous deep over
left upper 1/3rd of thigh, red in colour.
32) Contusion of size 6cm x 2cm x subcutaneous deep over
upper middle back, red in colour.
33) Contusion of size 2 cm x 2cm x subcutaneous deep over
right lower palmar aspect of the hand, red in colour.
34) Laceration of size 4 cm x 2cm x scalp deep noted over left
parietal region, obliquely situated, margins irregular with
infiltration of the blood.
35) Laceration of size 2 cm x 1cm x scalp deep noted over
occipital region, obliquely situated margins irregular with
infiltration of the blood.
9. Thus, it is apparent that the deceased was mercilessly
assaulted due to the instigation of the applicant. Therefore,
considering facts of the case, the applicant is not entitled for bail.
10. Ms. Khan pointed that accused No.4, the mother-in-law has
been released on bail. However, the role attributed to her is distinct.
In so far as the aspect of voice samples is concerned, it is a question
of trial and at this stage, no much significance can be attached to
that aspect, particularly when, the recorded telephonic conversation
has been considered by this Court to opine that there is a prima
facie case against the applicant.
Record indicate that the applicant was not produced before
the trial Court on many dates and he has been incarcerated for more
than five years. However, Mr. Dhedia, the learned APP, on
instructions, submitted that, in this case the prosecution is going to
examine maximum 10 to 12 witnesses. Therefore, if the trial is heard
on weekly basis, it will address the question of the long
incarceration. In the facts of the case, the said submission appears
Page 6 of 7
MANOJ 17-BA-1610-2026.DOC
reasonable as it will balance the rights of both sides and ultimately,
serve the interest of the justice.
11. In the wake of above, the applicant is not entitled for bail.
Hence, following Order:-
(a) Application is rejected.
(b) The trial Court is requested to expedite the hearing of
the case and take up the case on weekly basis.
(c) The prosecution shall keep the witnesses present on the
dates as would be fixed by the trial Court.
12. It is clarified that the observation made in this Order are
limited for the purpose of deciding the present Bail application and
should not influence the outcome of the trial and also not be taken
as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. In short, the
trial Court shall decide the said case on its own merits without
getting influenced by any of the said observations.
13. Application stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
(SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.)
Page 7 of 7
Checking your session…